Hall v. United States of America

Filing 13

ORDER directing the Clerk of Court to remove Plaintiff's June 6, 2018 filing 1 from the Court's pending motions report. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that by December 10, 2018 Plaintiff shall show cause why this matter should not be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute. Signed by Magistrate Judge Eileen S Willett on 11/30/2018. (REK)

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Gordon Leroy Hall,
Plaintiff,

10
11

ORDER

v.

12

No. CV-18-01738-PHX-SPL (ESW)

United States of America,

13

Defendant.

14
15
16

This matter is before the Court on its own review. On June 6, 2018, Plaintiff

17

initiated this action by filing a “Motion to Return Property” (Doc. 1). In its August 2018

18

Order (Doc. 8), the Court screened Plaintiff’s filing (Doc. 1) and construed it as a Motion

19

for Return of Property pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(g). The Court

20

directed service on Defendant United States of America (the “United States”) and ordered

21

the United States to respond. (Doc. 8 at 3-4).

22

If no criminal proceedings are pending, a Rule 41(g) motion is treated as a civil

23

complaint that is governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. United States v.

24

Ibrahim, 522 F.3d 1003, 1007 (9th Cir. 2008) (“Because there were no criminal

25

proceedings pending at the time of filing, the district court properly treated the motion as

26

a civil complaint governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.”); see also United

27

States v. Ritchie, 342 F.3d 903, 906 (9th Cir. 2003) (“If a Rule 41[g] motion is filed when

28

no criminal proceeding is pending, the motion is treated as a civil complaint seeking

1

equitable relief.”).1

2

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s filing (Doc. 1) is treated as a civil complaint rather than a

3

motion.

4
5

Here, Plaintiff’s criminal proceedings are no longer pending.

IT IS ORDERED directing the Clerk of Court to remove Plaintiff’s June 6, 2018
filing (Doc. 1) from the Court’s pending motions report.

6

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that by December 10, 2018, Plaintiff shall show

7

cause why this matter should not be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil

8

Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute.2

9

Dated this 30th day of November, 2018.

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

1

27

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(g) was formerly Rule 41(e). United States v.
Kaczynski, 416 F.3d 971, 973 (9th Cir. 2005) (“Rule 41(e) was changed to Rule 41(g) in
2002 and amended for stylistic purposes only.”).

28

2

The docket reflects that service was completed in September 2018 (Docs. 9, 10). The
United States has not filed a responsive brief and Plaintiff has taken no action.
-2-